Curious About New Rifle Test Cards

[mhampel]

A friend of mine recently received a new smallbore rifle. It came, as usual with and acceptable test card. It also came with a chamber that would be impossible to actually chamber a round (or even close the bolt). See attachment. An extrusion from the chamber into the breach. The extrusion was not loose, but fixed and impossible to remove. The dealer replaced the rifle, have not heard from the manufacturer.
I don't think I'll ever believe again.

[Tim S]

One also had to question how that rifle passed proof, something not done in house, but by an independent body.

It looks as if someone put a screwdriver into the chamber. I wonder whether the barrel chamber is as damaged as the insert that forms the face.

[40xguy]

brand and model of rifle ??

[Tim S]

It's an Anschutz 54.30.

[mhampel]

Tim is correct on the make of rifle. It was custom ordered in a 1907 stock.
Doesn't it strike anyone else as somewhat fraudulent that a test card came with a rifle that could not have been fired?
Geez, they could not have even but the bolt in the rifle and closed it.

[Tim S]

Or how it passed proof.

It's possible the damage occurred after assembly.

[jhmartin]

I suppose all manufacturers fall into the "Corporate Greed" hole every once in a while.

It really becomes depressing when one works for the company.

Quality mgr takes vacation
Company announces they will ship X number of widgets by some date (before QM comes back from vacation)
X number of widgets do indeed get shipped ... yes w/ a major S/W flaw they knew about.
(ask me how I know ... I left the same day I came back from vacation.......)

I've always wondered about the veracity of those test cards. Only thing I figured they were good for is to show the gun goes bang.
and now ...???

In my mind Anschutz years ago gave up the "leadership" in producing innovative quality match firearms. And it hurts to say that as I loved their guns. The 54.30 strikes me as a quick lash up to do the same as Walther..... and does not even do that well.
Now the only thing I love in them are the used ones.

Most of my shooters that I coach have either bought a good shooting used Anschutz or a new Walther.

In terms of the firearm above, I would not have accepted a replacement, but only a refund (the gun had obviously not been fired...) and gone to another manufacturer.

[pdeal]

If you have a company of more than one person you can't control everything everybody does. Sometimes stuff gets screwed up in unreasonable ways. A good company will do this infrequently and when it happens they will make it right. Move on.

[James Storm]

Perhaps the damage was done after the factory inspection and test target.

[Moore]

Honestly not sure if I would scream,cuss or just stand there and shake,If Id open the box to find that.

[Bryan996]

Perhaps the damage was done after the factory inspection and test target.

I agree with James on this. I believe its far more likely that the test card was fired at the factory and then the rifle was sent for proof, which it probably failed (remember proofing involves firing a round much stronger than standard ammo to prove its safe). The error was probably not checking the firearms that had been returned had all passed proof, but you're right it should never have been delivered to a customer. (It does also look like a foreign object is stuck in the breach which could have happened at proof). I cant imagine a company like Anschutz would risk their reputation sending out false test cards. I once had a firearm returned to me by a gunsmith after he had re-barrelled it and it had failed proof (headspace too tight) but they didn't tell him and he didn't check.

I also recently bought a long barrelled pistol that had a bulged barrel from brand new which must have happened at proof. I returned it and they fitted a new barrel, problem solved. Luckily for me I field stripped it the day I got it home to clean and noticed the damage. It might have been harder to prove if it had had been two or three months before I noticed the damage.

[1066]

That's shocking, and not the first time I've heard of items coming through the proof system with obvious faults. Reminds me of the recent VW/Audi dieselgate scandal where it was proved that they had be knowing cheating on the emission controls for years.

Surely a well respected company wouldn't do that would they?